Language of document : ECLI:EU:C:2019:1086


 


 



Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 12 December 2019 — Guiral Broto v EUIPO

(Case C715/19 P)

(Appeal — EU trade mark — Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed — Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Request for the appeal to be allowed to proceed not demonstrating that the issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law — Appeal not allowed to proceed)

1.      Appeal — Preliminary admission scheme — Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law — Burden of proof

(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)

(see para. 8)

2.      Appeal — Preliminary admission scheme — Request for an appeal to be allowed to proceed — Formal requirements — Scope

(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)

(see paras 9, 10)

3.      Appeal — Preliminary admission scheme — Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law — Inadequate or contradictory grounds —Request for the appeal to be allowed to proceed not demonstrating that the issue is significant — Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed

(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)

(see para. 11)

4.      Appeal — Preliminary admission scheme — Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law — Request for the appeal to be allowed to proceed not demonstrating that the issue is significant — Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed

(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)

(see paras 12-14)

Operative part

1.

The appeal is not allowed to proceed.

2.

Mr Ramón Guiral Broto is ordered to bear his own costs.